Subscribe to this blog

Get Email Updates!

Search This Blog

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague." -Cicero

OBAMA BUNDLER TIED TO CHINESE GOVERNMENT

* Note: I have included the entire Breitbart article below the hotair article. Breitbart rightly tells us that both Democrats and Republicans are able to be compromised and able to cheat regarding foreign campaign donations not just Obama.- W.E.

Most Republicans recall the Doodad Pro controversy
from almost exactly four years ago, where Team Obama campaign websites
turned off credit card security checks that allowed fraudulent and
foreign donations to flow into the campaign. Could that be happening
again? According to a new independent report from the Government
Accountability Institute and reported by Breitbart,
not only is it actually happening again — it’s actually gotten worse.

A
bundler for Barack Obama has set up a shady website operation to
collect donations to the campaign, but it’s based in Shanghai, and the
bundler has ties to the Chinese government:

In an explosive report set to send shockwaves through official Washington, the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) released
a 108-page GAI investigation into the threat of foreign and fraudulent
Internet campaign donations in U.S. federal elections (visit campaignfundingrisks.com to download the full report).Breitbart News obtained an advance copy of the bombshell report which reveals that the Obama.com website is not owned by the president’s campaign but rather by Obama bundler Robert
Roche, a U.S. citizen living in Shanghai, China. Roche is the chairman
of a Chinese infomercial company, Acorn International, with ties to
state-controlled banks that allow it to “gain revenue through credit
card transactions with Chinese banks.”There’s more.The unusual Obama.com website redirects traffic directly to a
donation page on the Obama campaign’s official website,
my.barackobama.com, which does not require donors tob enter their credit
card security code (known as the CVV code), thereby increasing the
likelihood of foreign or fraudulent donations. The website is managed by
a small web development firm, Wicked Global, in Maine. One of Wicked
Global’s employees, Greg Dorr, lists on his LinkedIn page his
additional employment with Peace Action Maine and Maine Voices for
Palestinian Rights. According to the GAI report, 68 percent of all
Internet traffic to Obama.com comes from foreign visitors.

GAI notes that the connections between the bundler and the Beijing regime come through China’s state-run media:

Obama.com Purchased By An Obama Bundler In Shanghai, China With Questionable Business Ties to State-Run Chinese Enterprises:
In 2008, Obama.com was purchased by an Obama fundraiser living in
Shanghai, China, whose business is heavily dependent on relationships
with Chinese state-run television and other state-owned entities. (see
page 62)

And not surprisingly under these circumstances, more than two-thirds of all traffic to Obama.com comes from outside the US:

68% Of Traffic To Anonymously Registered Obama.com Is Foreign:
According to industry leading web analytics site Markosweb, an
anonymously registered redirect site (Obama.com) features 68 % foreign
traffic. Starting in December 2011, the site was linked to a specific
donation page on the official BarackObama.com campaign website for ten
months. The page loaded a tracking number, 634930, into a space on the
website labeled “who encouraged you to make this donation.” That
tracking number is embedded in the source code for Obama.com and is
associated with the Obama Victory Fund. In early September 2012, the
page began redirecting to the standard Obama Victory Fund donation page

Breitbart promises more about the China connection later, but let’s take a look at the domestic side of Doodad Pro II: Chinese Boogaloo.
According to the executive summary of the report, Team Obama disabled
the security processes for credit-card transactions designed to detect
fraud and other illegal activity — but only on contributions. Those security protocols are fully engaged for merchandise purchases:

Obama Campaign Lacks the Industry-Standard Level Of Credit Card Security For Donations, But Uses It For Merchandise Purchases:
To purchase Obama campaign merchandise, the campaign requires buyers to
enter their credit card CVV security code, but does not require the
credit card security code to be entered when making an online campaign
donation (see page 60). By GAI’s estimates, the Obama campaign’s failure
to utilize industry-standard protections potentially costs the campaign
millions in extra processing fees. (see pages 35 and 59)

There is no other conclusion to reach but that this decision was
deliberate, especially since it became an issue just before the 2008
election. The Washington Post reported on it, at least for a brief
time, and it became a topic of some interest among Republicans in
Congress. Even if one was inclined to chalk it up to error by an
inexperienced campaign in 2008, that excuse no longer applies in 2012 —
especially not when the campaign seems more concerned about fraud in
merchandise sales, which would cost them more in reversals (product
costs) than returned donations would.Our Salem colleague Katie Pavlich has a great analysis of the report:

OFA seems to be taking advantage of a “foreign donor
loophole” by not using CVV on their campaign donation page. When you
donate online to the Obama campaign using a credit card, the
contribution webpage does not require donors to enter a secure CVV
number (also known as CSC, CVV2 or CVN), the three-digit securing code
on the back of credit cards. This code, although not 100 percent
effective, is used to ensure a person making a purchase physically
possesses the card. According to the report, 90 percent of e-commerce
and 19 of the 20 largest charities in the United States use a CVV code,
making its use standard industry practice in order to prevent fraud.
Another anti-fraud security measure includes software, better known as
an Address Verification System, to verify a donor’s address matches the
address on file with the credit card company. The investigation could
not determine whether OFA is using this type of software to prevent
fraudulent or illegal donations.Because of the lack of a CVV code requirement, the door is opened for
OFA to accept robo-donations, or in other words, large numbers of small
and automatic donations made online to evade FEC reporting
requirements. Although it isn’t illegal to decline the use of a secure
CVV credit card code for campaign donations, it is illegal to accept
campaign donations from foreign sources. Campaigns are required under
criminal code not to solicit, accept or receive foreign donations in any
amount. The Federal Elections Commission doesn’t require campaigns to
disclose the names of donors making contributions of less than $200
unless audited. In addition, FEC rules don’t require campaigns to keep
records of those giving less than $50. These rules combined with the
lack of a CVV numbers make it easy for campaigns to get away with taking
foreign donations. …As of September 26, 2012, the Obama campaign has raised $271,327,755
in contributions under $200 for the 2012 cycle. In 2008, it was
$335,139,233. The Romney campaign has raised just $58,456,968 in
contributions under $200 and has all CVV and online security measures in
place. In total, the Obama campaign raised $500 million online in 2008
with $335 million in contributions–more than half–falling under the $200
reporting requirement. Obama has raised more online funds than any
campaign in history. ….In this situation, the foreign donation problem coming from online
sources can be solved and President Obama’s promise of transparency can
be kept in one click by enabling all security protections and releasing
the names and records on all transactions under $200 to verify Obama for
America is a clean campaign operating within FEC law.

Katie drills deeply into this report, and demonstrates that this is no accident. Be sure to read her whole post.Update: Speaking of Chinese state media, members of Congress have begun pointing to one Chinese telecom as a threat to national security:

According to CBS, U.S. officials believe Huawei could
“intercept high-level communications, gather intelligence, wage cyber
war, and shut down or disrupt critical services” in the United States on
China’s behalf.While there is no “hard evidence” for these claims, according to CBS,
the possibility has led the Obama administration to interfere with
Huawei’s efforts to expand in the United States.In one case, federal officials convinced Sprint not to sign a $5
billion contract with the company to build a 4G wireless network, CBS
reported.Huawei already maintains a “handful” of networks in rural America,
according to CBS, but is trying to gain a bigger foothold with an “army
of lobbyists and public relations firms.”

The Internet and social media sites like
Facebook and Twitter have democratized elections, made the world more
interconnected, and allowed the velocity of information to be faster
than ever before.

But an extensive eight-month investigation by the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) released on Monday found these same forces can also be the greatest threat to America’s sovereignty (visit campaignfundingrisks.com to download the full report).
These technologies allow foreign donors to anonymously circumvent U.S.
campaign finance laws and directly influence elections by donating
repeatedly to candidates.

The 108-page GAI report found nearly half
of Congress, both political parties and presidential candidates, and
third-party fundraising groups that funnel money to political parties
and candidates were vulnerable to fraudulent and foreign donations. This
is a bipartisan problem potentially impacting all levels of government,
as those whose organizations were found to have been vulnerable include
President Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), the
Democratic National Committee (DNC), the Republican National Committee
(RNC), and third-party groups like ActBlue, which funnels money to
progressive politicians.

And the report found that the website Obama.com,
which is not owned by President Barack Obama's campaign but redirects
to the campaign's official donation page, may make the Obama campaign
the most susceptible to illicit foreign donations. Obama.com is
connected to an Obama campaign bundler, Robert Roche, who is from
Chicago but now lives and co-founded a corporation in China. Roche has
direct ties to China's state-owned banking industry.

Peter Schweizer, president of GAI, told
Breitbart News the ease with which foreigners could donate to American
candidates puts America’s sovereignty in peril.

Schweizer said he had initially thought
“we would find some bloggers overseas with motivation to support a
presidential candidate encouraging people to make donations,” but he was
“very surprised” by the study’s findings, including how easy it was for
foreigners to use "robo-donation" programs that allow foreigners to
potentially make thousands of small-dollar, fraudulent and automated
donations to candidates.

Schweizer said he “never thought” the GAI would find mysterious redirect sites like Obama.com and was “surprised how little security is required to receive online donations.”

“We are basically trusting political consultants and fundraisers to do the right thing when no one is looking,” Schweizer said.

The report found nearly half of Congress
was vulnerable to fraudulent and foreign directions. Of the 446 House
and Senate members who have an online donation page, 47.3% do not
require the Card Verification Value (CVV), which is the three or
four-digit security code on the back of credit cards, for internet
donations. Those in Congress who are vulnerable to foreign donations can
be seen at www.CampaignFundingRisks.com.

And the Obama campaign seems to be the most content with the "lax security."

The FEC requires campaigns to make their
“best efforts” to collect identifying information on all contributors
who donate more than $50.30 and even more specific information, such as
the donor’s occupation and employer, for donations over $200.

As the report notes, donations less than
$50, though, fall under the “Pass-the-Hat” rule, which means campaigns
can report all such donations under a lump sum and do not have to make
their “best efforts” to collecting information on these small-dollar
donors.

Because foreigners can exploit the
“Pass-the-Hat” rule, the report found that “any campaign not using
these industry-standard security tools is increasing its costs and
unnecessarily increasing the risk of at least two types of potential
fraud":

The Fraudulent High Dollar Donor(s): –the fraudulent high
dollar donor is politically motivated and is seeking to avoid detection
by making numerous donations below the $200 dollar threshold, over which
their donation must be identified; they may seek to exceed campaign
donation limits.

The Unintentional Fraudster –a foreign
national who is unaware of U.S. election laws but sympathetic to the
campaign. Such an individual can easily end up on a campaign donation
page. Given that a number of campaigns list the U.S. donation laws in an
inconspicuous place on the “donate” page, it is easy to see how illegal
donations can be made with no malicious intent.

And the Obama campaign is most vulnerable to both types of fraudsters.

For example, the study found “the Obama
campaign regularly and aggressively posts solicitations for donations
and campaign memorabilia on Facebook,” and “the campaign does not make
clear in these postings that only U.S. citizens or permanent residents
are allowed to contribute.” Fundraising solicitations from the Obama
campaign have gone out to foreigners, asking them to contribute in
amounts of less than $200. Similar solicitations have been posted in
Arabic, Taiwanese, and Chinese on Facebook and on Middle Eastern and
Asian websites.

Even though the Obama campaign is touted
for its technological sophistication and sites run by top Obama
technology advisers use the “CVV” feature, the Obama campaign itself
does not use the “CVV” feature on its donation pages -- even though it
does use the feature on the merchandise pages where it sells campaign
merchandise.

This means someone who donates $2,500 to
the campaign online has to go through less security than someone who
goes online to buy an Obama campaign mug.

“This creates a security risk that is
compounded by the considerable foreign interest in President Obama’s
political history, personal story, and views,” the report notes.

And according to the study, BarackObama.com, the campaign’s main website, receives approximately 43% of its traffic from foreign IP addresses.

In addition, popular websites touting
Obama’s campaign and linking to its donation page have been found in
places like China, Azerbaijan, Vietnam, the Netherlands, Italy, Japan,
Norway, Egypt, Hong Kong, and South Korea.

The report notes that not using the CVV
feature “is quite possibly costing the campaign millions of dollars in
additional fees,” but the campaign is still not using it. Perhaps this
is so because the Obama campaign has benefited from donations slipping
through the cracks in the past.

In 2008, the report discovered that an
individual using the name “Doodad Pro” made at least 791 contributions
totaling $19,065 to the Obama campaign while others named “Good Will,”
“Test Person” from “Some Place, UT,” “gjtjtjtjtjtjr, AP,” and
“QWERTTYYU” also contributed to the campaign.

The most interesting -- or suspicious -- site is Obama.com, which the campaign strangely does not own. According to the report, nearly 68% of internet traffic to Obama.comcomes
from foreign locations. And the website is connected to Robert Roche,
who lives in China and co-founded a Chinese company called Acorn
International. Roche, the report found, made 19 visits to the White
House since 2009, including being seated at the head table during a
State dinner with Chinese president Hu Jintao in 2011.

Unlike the Obama campaign, the Romney campaign website uses the "CVV" feature but it is not without vulnerabilities.

For instance, Romney's campaign also has
Facebook and Twitter accounts in Arabic that give off the impression
they are associated with the Romney campaign. These accounts link to the
Romney campaign’s page and are presumably for a foreign audience.

In addition, the report found some of
Romney’s top bundlers, like Akin Gump's Tom Loeffler, have lobbied for
foreign governments like Saudi Arabia.

Since 1980, Philippine President
Ferdinand Marcos, the Chinese government, powerful Indonesian families,
foreign criminal gangs, and the Turkish government have tried to
influence American officials through campaign donations.

Turkish government officials, the report
notes, once bragged about sending hundreds of thousands of dollars in
“un-itemized contributions” to then Speaker of the House Dennis
Hastert’s campaign between 1996 and 2000 and the government of Pakistan
has shuttled campaign donations through intermediaries to presidential
candidates and members of Congress who sat on the Foreign Affairs
Committee, such as Congressman Dan Burton.

With the internet, foreigners can now
attempt to influence American officials anonymously and conveniently --
with the click of a mouse.

According to the study, influential
members of Congress had websites that made them vulnerable to illicit
foreign donations. For instance, Rep. Ilena Ros-Lehtinen, Chairman of
the House International Affairs Committee, had a campaign website that
prior to May 1, 2012 did not require the CVV to contribute to her
campaign. Though there was no evidence of illicit campaign
contributions, her website was vulnerable to them.

The study also found that during Sen.
Marco Rubio's 2010 senate run, Rubio's campaign did not require the CVV
from his online contributors and foreign websites, including many in
South America, often featured videos that urged viewers to "donate" to
Rubio's campaign. One potential reason for Rubio's popularity abroad on
websites was the idea of "ethnic solidarity" among Hispanics willing to
support a rising star of the same heritage.

The report also noted foreigners can also
donate to third-party organizations on both sides of the aisle that
funnel money to political candidates.

The GAI study acknowledged “by design,
social media’s expansive and viral nature disseminates information,
ideas, and causes,” and as a result, “social media is difficult to
control, and indeed should not be controlled.”

“Campaigns need to be aware that the age
of social media is an age where donation requests go viral, reaching the
furthest corners of the world,” the report notes. “Failure to employ
industry standard security and transparent accountability is almost an
invitation to foreign money to inject itself into federal campaigns.”

The United States has laws against
foreign campaign donations to protect its sovereignty and, in January
2012, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upheld these laws banning foreign contributions were constitutional.

The GAI report recommends election officials:

Integrate safeguards to limit the
solicitation of money from foreigners by requiring donors with foreign
IP addresses to provide proof of U.S. citizenship before they can
proceed to the donate page

Immediately require campaigns to
use industry-standard anti-fraud security technologies including, but
not limited to, the Card Verification Value (CVV) and a rigorous Address
Verification System (AVS)

Immediately require all campaigns
to retain and disclose identifying information on all online campaign
contributions, including those falling under the $200 nondisclosure
threshold currently allowed under federal law

Address the threat of
"Robo-Donations": The absence of industry-standard anti-fraud credit
card security features render campaigns more vulnerable to so-called
“robo-donations.” Robo-donations are large numbers of small, automated
donations made through the Internet to evade FEC reporting
requirements.

Schweizer, president of GAI, put a
particular emphasis on the "robo-donations" that "can literally make a
thousand small contributions under different names to fall below the
disclosure thresholds."

These "robo-donations" essentially allow
foreigners to threaten America's sovereignty and potentially undermine
its elections, which is why Schweizer said it is "absolutely essential"
to mandate more disclosure and credit card security for campaign
donations.

“Amazon.com
uses more credit card security for online book purchases than many
federal candidates accepting $2,000 campaign donations via credit card,"
Schweizer said. "To protect the integrity of U.S. elections, that must
change."